20130472 Ver 1_R-3601_4C_Minutes_20130320

�,w.5rA1'E
March 20, 2013
To: Brad Shaver
Fritz Rohde
Gary Jordan
Pace Wilber
Travis Wilson
David Harris
Steve Sollod
Gary Lovering
Stephen Lane
Kevin Fischer
Mason Herndon
Charles R. Cox
Chris Militscher
Chris Rivenbark
Ron Lucas
Jackson Provost
From: Paul Atkinson, PE
Project Manager -TIP East
Subject: Minutes of the Permit Drawing Review 114C"
Meeting for R -3601: US 17 -74 -76 from NC133 /SR
1472 (Village Road) interchange to the US 421 /NC 133 interchange in Brunswick and New Hanover
Counties.
The "4C" Meeting for R -3601 was held on February 14, 2013 from 10:30 AM to 11:30 AM in the NCDOT Structure
Design Conference Room at the Century Center Complex in Raleigh, NC. The following were in attendance:
Participants: Team Members
Brad Shaver, USACE (PRESENT)
Gary Jordan, USFWS (ABSENT)
Travis Wilson, NCWRC (PRESENT)
Steve Sollod, NCDCM (PRESENT)
Stephen Lane, NCDCM (PRESENT)
Mason Herndon, NCDWQ (PRESENT)
Chris Militscher, EPA (PHONE)
Ron Lucas, FHWA (PRESENT)
Fritz Rohde, NMFS PHONE)
Pace Wilber, NMFS (PHONE)
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
HYDRAULICS UNIT
1590 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 2 769 9 -1 590
Sunnort Staff
David Harris, NCDOT REU (ABSENT)
Gary Lovering, NCDOT Roadway (PRESENT)
Kevin Fischer, NCDOT Structures (PRESENT)
Charles R. Cox, NCDOT PDEA (ABSENT)
Chris Rivenbark, NCDOT NES (PRESENT)
Jackson Provost, NCDOT Division (PRESENT)
Paul Atkinson, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Other Attendees
Brook Anderson, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Rachel Evans, NCDOT Hydraulics (PRESENT)
Amy James, NCDOT NEU (PRESENT)
Jeff Walston, NCDOT REU (PRESENT)
Cheryl Evans, NCDOT ITS (PRESENT)
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG/DOH/
LOCATION:
CENTURY CENTER COMPLEX
BUILDING B
1020 BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE
RALEIGH NC

The 4C meeting began with Paul Atkinson ( NCDOT) giving a brief introduction of the project and meeting participants.
Paul went through the permit drawings, discussing each permit site by plan sheet. Specific comments are listed below by
plan sheet number:
Sheet 4: Paul Atkinson stated that at permit Site 1 there is a replacement of a pipe with impacts shown associated with
that. He also stated that the temporary impacts past the end of the rip rap have not been shown and will be added. No other
comments on this site.
Sheet 5: Paul Atkinson stated that mechanized clearing impacts have been shown around the rip rap pads that are placed
at the proposed pipes at permit Sites 2 and 3. Mason Herndon asked if NCDOT would consider hand clearing instead of
mechanized clearing. Steve Sollod stated that NCDCM had a problem with using mechanized clearing at those sites as
well as Site 4, plan sheet 6. It was agreed to use hand clearing instead of mechanized clearing at Sites 2, 3, and 4. No other
comments on these sites.
Sheet 6 & 7: Paul stated that at Site 5 there is a sliver of fill in the wetland. Mason Herndon questioned fill line and
wetland boundary locations and why the pipes extended so far into the wetland. Paul clarified that the existing slope
extends closer to the wetland than the proposed fill and the pipe must extend to the bottom of the existing fill. Stephen
Lane asked if the clearing was needed for sediment and erosion control. Mason Herndon said it was. Stephen Lane and
Mason Herndon both stated their preference for hand clearing at this site. It was agreed to use hand clearing instead of
mechanized clearing.
Paul continued the review of Site 5 by moving on to the pipe at the matchline of plansheet 6 and 7. He stated impacts are
shown for pipe that will be installed by trenchless construction and will replace an existing pipe that is being filled with
flowable material. Mason Herndon asked about the pipe appearing to extend too far into wetland.
Paul reaffirmed that this is due to the proposed fill slope not extending as far as the existing fill slope does. Paul also
mentioned temporary excavation and temporary fill in wetland impacts to accommodate the clean out of an existing pipe.
Brad Shaver asked if there could be a legend to differentiate between temporary and permanent excavation. Paul stated
that the temporary impacts are noted on the summary sheet. No other comments were made on that site.
Paul stated that Site 6 consisted of temporary excavation and temporary fill in the wetland to accommodate the clean out
of an existing pipe. No other comments were made on this site.
Paul stated that Site 7 consisted of a sliver of mechanized clearing at the edge of the fill slope. Mason Herndon requested
that this be changed to hand clearing. Paul agreed that since the fill slope was not entering the wetland that he was not
opposed to this. No other comments were made on this site.
Sheet 8: Paul stated that at Site 8 mechanized clearing is called for to install the rip rap pad at the outlet of the trenchless
construction pipe. It was agreed that this could be changed to hand clearing. Paul stated that this site also consists of
temporary excavation and temporary fill in the wetland to accommodate the clean out of an existing pipe. No other
comments were made on this site.
Paul stated that at Site 9 mechanized clearing is called for to install the rip rap pad at the outlet of the trenchless
construction pipe. Mason Herndon asked if that could be changed to hand clearing. Paul agreed to hand clearing at this
site. No other comments were made on this site.
Paul stated that the impacts at Site 10 are for the plugging and fill of an existing pipe. Mason Herndon stated that this
shouldn't require mechanized clearing. Paul agreed to hand clearing at this site. No other comments were made on this
site.
Sheet 9 & 10: Paul stated that at Site 11 there are associated wetland impacts at the bridge abutments of the proposed
bridge. There are several temporary work bridges associated with the construction of the proposed bridge. Stephen Lane

brought up his concern that the temporary work bridges over Alligator Creek will cut off navigation for access points
upstream of the bridges and be a big permit problem. Stephen Lane questioned if there can be an opening in the
temporary bridge, a span removed from the center, or if the temporary bridges can be constructed to maintain existing
vertical clearance. Kevin Fischer mentioned that these bridges required drilled shafts due to the depth of muck/mud.
Jackson mentioned the possibility of constructing the bridges using top down construction and drilled shafts in order to
eliminate the work bridge on the outside. There was discussion about the 404 impacts due to drilled shafts. Paul stated that
the temporary and permanent impacts due to drilled shafts are listed on the permit impact summary sheet. Paul clarified
that in order to avoid permit issues the temporary work bridges could be raised to maintain existing navigational clearance
or leave an open span to allow for navigation. All were in agreement.
Mason Herndon questioned the use of mechanized clearing at the toe of fill at this site. He requested the use of hand
clearing. Paul and Jackson Provost agreed to hand clearing at this site. No other comments were made on this site.
Paul asked if hand clearing should be called for at Site 12 as well. The group agreed that hand clearing should be used. No
other comments were made on this site.
Sheet 13: Paul stated that at Site 13 there is permanent fill in wetland due to realignment of Old Blackwell Road and
mechanized clearing will be required. Mason Herndon questioned if this site would be suitable for hand clearing. Jackson
Provost stated that there is more vegetation in this area which will require mechanized clearing. The group agreed on this.
No other comments were made on this site.
Paul stated that at Site 14 surface water impacts were due to widening of the road over an existing stream. The widening is
due to the addition of a turnaround at this location. Paul also mentioned the existing storm drain system, capturing parking
lot stormwater, is being extended to outlet where it is currently going. Brad Shaver said he had spoken with Amy James
and they had discussed that this site should be reviewed before the permit application to determine if it warrants 2:1
mitigation. Brad also commented that at 4B it was mentioned that we would try to capture the stormwater and run it
across to the new location of Blackwell Road. Brook Anderson stated that roadway stormwater drainage from the right
side of the -Y- alignment and some from the left side of the -Y- alignment is collected in a system on the right side of the -
Y- alignment. The system outlets into a grassed lined ditch at the intersection of -Y- (NC 133) and Blackwell Road and
receives some treatment prior to draining into the wetlands. Due to the elevations of the existing parking lot storm drain
system, that stormwater could not be redirected to the other side of the -Y- alignment. Mason Herndon asked if the stream
was classified perennial or intermittent. Amy James said she would look into that and let him know. Paul mentioned that
this is another site where temporary stream impacts should be included just beyond the end of the pipes and stated they
would be added to the permit drawings. No more comments were made on this site.
Paul stated that at Site 15 there is a sliver of mechanized clearing just beyond the fill slope and that can be changed to
hand clearing. It was agreed to use hand clearing instead of mechanized clearing. No other comments were made on this
site.
Wetland Permit Impact Summary Sheet: Paul reviewed the quantities on the summary sheet. These quantities will
change since most of the mechanized clearing will be changed to hand clearing per the comments at this meeting. Steve
Sollod expressed his concern for the amount of CAMA permanent fill in wetlands associated with Site 4. He asked if this
could be reduced in anyway. Paul stated that the CAMA impacts are at the bridge abutment and the fill slopes have been
pulled in as much as possible. Mason Herndon asked what types of utility impacts are expected. Brook and Paul stated
that they do not have that information. Jackson Provost stated that utility conflicts have been greatly reduced by
eliminating the onsite detour that was required before deciding to construct a single bridge over the Brunswick River but
that there might be some boring under the Brunswick River.
Paul asked if there were any other comments or questions. Travis Wilson said that after the constructability review
meeting back in May 2012 it was discussed that there was a need for further discussion with WRC, DMF, and NOAA
relating to Section 7 issues, specifically in -water work and the moratorium. Fritz said he had discussed with Amy James to

contact NMFS relating to this. Amy James said that she had been in contact and will be sending shortly the recently
received revised plans. Fritz mentioned that the moratorium window has not changed since there are two species of
sturgeon in this river. Jackson Provost said that during the constructability review there was a question about if the casings
are installed outside the moratorium can work be performed in the casings during the moratorium window. Travis Wilson
stated that WRC are receptive to that, while Fritz reminded that it could be viewed differently by the Section 7
representatives. Someone stated that the request should be clear on any work that the contractor would like to perform
during the moratorium, such as extracting piles or work inside the casings. There may need to be a future meeting to
further discuss the moratoriums and construction issues with the applicable parties.
It was asked when let was scheduled, Jackson Provost stated that it is set for February 2014.